View
224
Download
8
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Tomb at Azor
Citation preview
Israel Antiquities Authority / רשות העתיקות is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to'Atiqot / עתיקות.
http://www.jstor.org
Israel Antiquities Authority / רשות העתיקות
/ A Middle Bronze Age IIB Tomb at Azorקבר מתקופת הברונזה הקדומה באזורAuthor(s): Amir Gorzalczany, Daphna Ben-Tor, Jonathan Rand, אמיר גורזלזני, דפנה בן-תור and יונתן רנדSource:'Atiqot /עתיקות
44 / 2003), pp. 171-178 )התשס"גPublished by: Israel Antiquities Authority / רשות העתיקותStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23461392Accessed: 06-12-2015 14:57 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
'Atiqot 44,2003
A Middle Bronze Age iib Tomb at Azor
Amir Gorzalczany, Daphna Ben-Tor and Jonathan Rand
In December 1996, during the demolition of
a building on Spinoza Street in Azor (Fig. 1:
1; map ref. 13156/15902), a tractor damaged a Middle Bronze Age IIB tomb which lay beneath its foundation. The tomb had already
suffered considerable damage at the time of the
building's construction. A salvage excavation
was undertaken by the IAA in order to document
what remained of the tomb and its contents.1
Dothan (1958:272-273) excavated another
MB IIB tomb nearby (Fig. 1:2). This tomb
was a burial cave containing pottery, numerous
scarabs and remains of horses interred alongside
human skeletal remains. The discovery of two
Middle Bronze Age tombs at a short distance
from each other is not a coincidence but rather
an indication that a cemetery once existed in the
vicinity. The area continued to function as burial
grounds in subsequent periods (Dothan 1993).
Fig. 1 Location map of the MB IIB tomb discussed
in this report (1) and of the tomb published by M.
Dothan (2).
The Tomb
The remains at Spinoza Street were too
sparse to allow us to characterize the tomb's
construction. It had been hewn into the kurkar
bedrock, but its outline was unclear. The tomb
cavity had filled up with a loose sandy matrix
mixed with nodules of eroded kurkar. The finds
were concentrated in a relatively small area
(0.7 x 1.2 m) in the center of the tomb (Fig. 2). In the northwest part of the tomb some unfired
reddish mudbrick material, possibly used for
flooring, was uncovered. The small size of the
tomb and the presence of this mudbrick material
lead us to believe that it was most likely a cist
grave.2
The Finds
Skeletal Remains
The heavily disturbed skeletal remains of at
least three individuals in primary burial were
recovered from the tomb. Anthropological
analysis of the remains reveals that these
Fig. 2. Pottery vessels in situ.
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
172 001<2/\1.(12/\א¥, 0/\1>11א/\ 8 £14-7011 /\א0 1014/118^14 8/1140
7
£!§. 3. ?0116זץ.
10 0 ן ו ו
063011ק110מ 8.6§. 140. 0111601 .140
0133§6 1נ10\¥0,131§6 §13ץ §1115. 111/1 4*801 1
0133§6 610\¥3,131§6 §13ץ §1118. 106/1 4*\80 2
3 1'*\80 112/1 .06001311011 61088 1111161 1)30 11111 1)0311118116 1)8.6 .1118§ '{£13 636 ,6§0133
0133§6 0318106, 03110 §13ץ 0016 *¥1111*¥11116 330 §13}' §1118. 100/1 81013§6_ן31 4
£!§111 0133§6. 103/3 3ט§161 5
0133§6 !נ10\¥0. 103/2 161§13• 6
013ץ, 16001811 0016. 103/1 0ץ11301031,ן0§161 7
8317 0133§6, £36 *¥11116 §1118, *¥£661 00311)13§. 101/1 01קן>61 ^3§161 8
Fig. 3. Pottery.
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A Middle Bronze Age iib Tomb at Azor 173
individuals were between the ages of 20-40
when interred, and that at least one of them
was positively identified as female.3 Although no specific pattern for these remains could be
observed, two of the three recovered skulls
were found adjacent to each other, with the third
found in the bowl illustrated in Fig. 3:1.
Hematite Cylinder Seal
For the seal recovered in the tomb see Stein, this
volume.
Pottery
A small group of ceramic vessels (Fig. 3) was recovered from the tomb, most probably
representing an incomplete sample of the
tomb's original assemblage. The pottery was
in poor condition, primarily due to the soil
conditions, but also due to the damaged state
of the tomb. The assemblage is homogeneous and characteristic of local pottery from the MB
IIB period; some forms suggest an early MB
IIB date (see below). Similar assemblages are
found at the nearby cemeteries at the Rishon
Le-Ziyyon Dunes (Levy 1993),4 the Tel Aviv
Harbor site (Kaplan 1955), and, somewhat
farther away, at Tell Beit Mirsim Stratum E
(Albright 1933).
Platter bowls (Fig. 3:1-3).— All three platter bowls are shallow with thin everted rims. One
(Fig. 3:3) has a red burnished cross decoration and band along the inner rim on the inside of
the bowl. This type of design has its beginnings in the MB IIA, but continues through the
transitional period and into the MB IIB (e.g.,
Kaplan 1955: Fig. 4:11 and from Rishon Le
Ziyyon Dunes where this design is found
on bowls of both the MB IIA and MB IIB). Similar bowls are known from Gezer (Dever 1986: PI. 3:24), Jatt (Porat, Yannai and Kasher
1999:27, Pis. 20:8,9; 23:1-3) and Tel Megadim
(unpublished; Sam Wolff, pers. comm.). The
same vessel type but lacking the cross design was found at Tel Michal Stratum XVII (Negbi 1989: Fig. 5.1:8) and Tell Beit Mirsim Stratum E
(Albright 1933: PI. 10:6).
Storage jar.— The lower half of a storage jar
(Fig. 3:4; cf. Kenyon 1960: Fig. 183:2) was also
recovered, the upper half having been removed
by the tractor.
Juglets (Fig. 3:5-8).— Four juglets were
found. Of these, two (Fig. 3:5, 6) were only
partially recovered (rim and handle) and may be of either piriform or cylindrical shape.5 A
complete cylindrical juglet (Fig. 3:7) is typical of the MB IIB period and finds parallels at Jericho (Kenyon 1960: Fig. 309:14) and
Ginnosar (Epstein 1974: Fig. 13:14). Another
common form of this period is the dipper juglet
(Fig. 3:8) which conforms to Kenyon,s type Bib with a slightly rounded body (e.g., Kenyon 1960: Fig. 151:8; cf. Kaplan 1955: Figs. 3:16; 4:
5). Another parallel was found at Jatt (Porat, Yannai and Kasher 1999:31, PI. 22:12-15).
The Scarabs
Two scarabs5' (Figs. 4, 5) were found in the
tomb which, as was demonstrated in the pottery discussion above, dates to the early MB IIB.
Scarabs found in the archaeological deposits
ranging between the late MB IIA-early MB
IIB reflect the earliest occurrence of scarabs
in Israel and comprise the "early Palestinian
scarab series" (Ward and Dever 1994:5, 6,
Groups IIA-III). A recent study of these scarabs
(Ben-Tor 1997) argues that they correspond with the middle/late Dynasty XIII in Egypt and that they are mostly local Canaanite
productions, imitating Egyptian late Middle
Kingdom prototypes. The two scarabs found
in the Azor tomb are typical examples of these
locally-made scarabs, the production of which
continued and developed throughout the Middle
Bronze Age.
The analysis of the scarab's designs and
features follows the Tufnell-Ward typology, which is the best one established for the relative
sequence of Middle Bronze Age scarabs although their absolute dates can no longer be accepted
(Ben-Tor 1997:163-166). The designs follow
Tufnell (1984:115-140) and the scarab features
follow Ward and Dever ( 1994:162-165).
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
174 Amir Gorzalczany, Daphna Ben-Tor and Jonathan Rand
Scarab 1 (Fig. 4) L: 17 mm; W: 12 mm; H: 8 mm.
Design class 3D1—Egyptian signs and
symbols: Cartouches—simple oblong (Tufnell
1984:121-122, PI. 17). A simple oblong cartouche in the center is
flanked by two addorsed red crowns on nb signs
and two addorsed red crowns symmetrically
displayed below them. Above the cartouche are a
winged sun disk and a three-stem papyrus plant.
At the bottom of the base below the cartouche is
a nb sign. The cartouche encloses a vertical line
of four signs: hr, htp, r,r.
Back type: Lined Stylistic. Head type: D6.
Side type־. e9.
Discussion־. The signs enclosed by the
cartouche comprise a variation of the so-called
cnrc formula, the origin and meaning of which
have been the subject of much debate (Richards
1992:29-32; Keel 1995:175-176; Ben-Tor
1997:175; Richards 2001). Variations of this
formula are amply represented on Middle
Bronze Age scarabs (Tufnell 1984:121, Pis.
16-20), including many examples in the early series (Kirkbride 1965: Figs. 282:8, 16, 19, 20;
283:23; 285:9,14-17,19; 286:12,13,18; 287:1,
9; 288:12; Tufnell 1973: Fig. 1:18,22,47; Ward
and Dever 1994:99, Fig. 5:1a: 9, 11-13). No
examples of this design were found in Egypt in
1 0 1 1
Fig. 4. Scarab No. 1.
contexts earlier than Dynasty XV, corroborating
Ward's observation that the design occurs
in Canaan earlier than in Egypt (Ward 1987:
524-526). It has been largely accepted that the
variations of this formula have no meaning in
the Egyptian language (Tufnell 1984:121; Keel
1995:176; Ben-Tor 1997:175). Moreover, the
common occurrence of misrendered signs and
pseudohieroglyphs suggest that these formulae
reflect ignorance of the form and meaning of
the Egyptian hieroglyphs. The few attempts that have been made to read these formulae
(Keel 1995:176; Richards 2001:150-163) are
not convincing, as there is no consistency in
the choice of the signs or in their order. For
the same reason, suggestions implying that the
signs represent local Canaanite script (Kitchen
1989:278-280) are equally unacceptable. One form of this formula, however, displaying
the hieroglyphs htp n 7־r (Tufnell 1973: Fig. 1:
47; Tufnell 1984: PI. 10:1522, PI. 17:1794),
suggests knowledge of the Egyptian language
and therefore may be considered a highly
probable Egyptian prototype for many of the
rnrc formula variations (Ben-Tor 1997:175). An
example found at Nubt represented by two seal
impressions made by the same scarab (Petrie and Quibell 1896: PL 80:45) was considered as
the only surviving Middle Kingdom prototype for this formula, based on the late Middle
Kingdom date of most sealings found at the
site (Ben-Tor 1997:175). However, a study of
Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate
Period scarabs currently being prepared by
this author (Daphna Ben-Tor) reveals that
the design occurring on the Nubt sealings,
depicting a three-stem papyrus plant above and
below the central base motif, is not attested in
the known corpus of Middle Kingdom scarabs.
The design is, however, found in the Second
Intermediate Period excavated series both in
Egypt and in Palestine (Griffith 1890: PI. 10:
38; Petrie 1906: PI. 9:148; Tufnell 1984: PI.
3:1086, 1089, 1091, 1105, 1106, 1111, 1112),
strongly arguing for a Second Intermediate
Period date for the scarab used on the Nubt
sealings. There is no conclusive evidence
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A Middle Bronze Age iib Tomb at Azor 175
to determine a Canaanite or Egyptian origin for the scarabs bearing the htp n rr formula.7
Whether these scarabs originated in Egypt or in
Palestine, many variations of this formula found
in Canaanite sites demonstrate local Canaanite
developments (Tufnell 1984: Pis. 10:1521; 16:
1700, 1716, 1757; 17:1776, 1777, 1787; 18:
1806; 29:2272; Ward and Dever 1994: Fig. 5:
la: 11). The order of the signs is often alternated,
reflecting a decorative preference and ignorance
of the original meaning (Ben-Tor 1997:175). This scarab, displaying a meaningless
variation of the formula, bearing three of the
original signs: htp r r, is a clear Canaanite
variation of the Egyptian prototype. The other
decorative elements on the base of the scarab,
such as the three-stem papyrus plants, addorsed
red crowns and the simple oblong cartouche,
were commonly engraved on Canaanite
scarabs (Tufnell 1984: Pis. 3, 12, 17), imitating
Egyptian signs and symbols which occur on late
Middle Kingdom scarabs (Tufnell 1975: Figs.
2:22-57; 5:248-255; 9:382). The winged sun
disk, however, is not found on Middle Kingdom
scarabs and its occurrence on Canaanite scarabs
(e.g., Tufnell 1984: Pis. 9,10:1488, 1489, 1491,
1492, 1495, 1524) was most probably inspired from Syrian cylinder seals (Teissier 1996:
95-98).8
Scarab 2 (Fig. 5) L: 16.5 mm; W: 12 mm; H: 7.5 mm.
Design class 3E1—Egyptian signs and symbols: Panels—three or more signs in margins (Tufnell
1984:122,123; PI. 19:183-1-47). The base is divided vertically by two lines
into three panels. Inside the panels, the three
signs r, n, r are repeatedly displayed, arranged in vertical lines.
Back type: Plain stylistic. Head type : D4.
Side type: d4.
Discussion: The vertically arranged cnr signs
inside the panels display the most common
variation of the cnrr formula, after which the
design was named. Panel designs are not found
on Middle-Kingdom-design or private-name
1 0
Fig. 5. Scarab No. 2.
scarabs but commonly occur on Middle Bronze
Age scarabs (Keel 1995:180), already in the
early series (Tufnell 1973: Fig. 1:22; Tufnell
1984: PI. 19:1832; Ward and Dever 1994: Fig. 5:
lb:37). The signs inside the panels are primarily variations of the rnrr formula (Tufnell 1984: PI.
19:1831, 1832, 1834-1847) corroborating the
Canaanite origin of the panel designs.
Conclusions
The tomb described here can be added to the
increasing data concerning MB IIB burial
customs as revealed by recent excavations
conducted in the area. It is unfortunate that
no large settlements were excavated in the
area, rather only a few small unwalled ones
and mostly cemeteries at Fladar Yosef, Tel Ha
Shomer, Bat Yam, Rishon Le-Ziyyon and Yavné
Yam (Gophna and Beck 1981:48-63; 1988;
Levy 1993:49-50), the Country Club Junction
(HA 1978:21), Kefar Shemaryahu, Sedé Dov
Airport and The Exhibitions Grounds at Tel Aviv
(Kaplan 1971:305; 1978), the Tel Aviv Harbor
(Kaplan 1955), Dharhat el-Humraya, Nes
Ziyyona and El-Jisr (Ory 1926; 1945; 1948), Bet Dagan, located to the east of Azor (Gophna
1967), and several additional unpublished tombs excavated recently in Tel Aviv and Petah
Tiqva (Martin Peilstôcker and Kamil Sari,
pers. comm.). To these sites one might add
several MB IIA and MB IIB sites (Sites 20, 74
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
176 Amir Gorzalczany, Daphna Ben-Tor and Jonathan Rand
and 91) reported in the Herzliyya survey map
(Gophna and Ayalon 1998:25*, 36*, 91*, 92*, with additional references). Finally, a large EB
I cemetery which was partially reused in the
MB II was recently excavated at the Kaplan Junction, Tel Aviv, yielding, among other finds, bronze weapons and scarabs (Edwin van den
Brink and Eliot Braun, pers. comm.). It is worth noting that as far as we know,
the MB IIA period is characterized by the
blossoming of settlements in the Sharon area
(Kochavi, Beck and Gophna 1979:161-162). The MB IIB-C, on the other hand, shows
a major southward shift in settlement patterns, with remarkable emphasis in the coastal area
and the Western Negev (Oren 1997:255-257). The Nahal Yarqon Basin, as we can judge by means of the increasing number of burials
discovered in recent years, seems to represent
an intermediate phase during the shift toward
the south, during the late eighteenth and the
early seventeenth centuries BCE. These sites
may represent primarily undiscovered rural
settlements that presumably existed in the area
circumscribed by the major sites (Jaffa, Aphek and Gezer) attributed to this period. Since those
rural villages were small and are presently covered by thick layers of alluvium, it is difficult
to locate them, but we can be assured of their
existence mostly through the existence of those
cemeteries cited above. This settlement pattern could be related to "the remarkable extension
of land use in the coastal plain region during the Middle Bronze Age II" (Gophna and Beck
1981:78); that is, the inclusion of previously uncultivated regions into the regional economic
framework.
Notes
1 Salvage excavations (Permit No. A-2402) were
conducted by Jonathan Rand who also prepared most of the material for publication, on behalf of
the Israel Antiquities Authority in December 1995.
The Corporation for the Economic Development of Azor sponsored the excavations. Our thanks go to Marik Molokondov for his assistance during the
excavation; Erela Tzarfaty (pottery restoration); Marina Shuishka-Arnov (draftsperson); Tsila
Sagiv (object photography); Z. Shurrer and Sam
Wolff (editing); Edwin van den Brink for kindly
providing me with the location of the Azor MB II
tomb excavated by M. Dothan; Edwin van den Brink
and Eliot Braun for permission to mention the recent
excavations at Kaplan Junction; and Eli Yannai for
his observations concerning the ceramic assemblage.
Daphna Ben-Tor is responsible for the scarab section, and Amir Gorzalczany for the remainder. 2 For a discussion of tomb construction in the Middle
Bronze Age see Hallote 1994, especially pp. 51-55.
We are grateful to Sam Wolff for this reference. 3 We express our appreciation to J. Warden, IAA, for
his analysis of the skeletal remains from the tomb.
These remains were transferred to representatives of
the Ministry of Religious Affairs for reburial.
4 Our thanks are extended to Yossi Levy for kindly
allowing us to see the material from his recent
excavations at the Rishon Le-Ziyyon Dunes site,
whose final report is in preparation. 5 A button base, presumably belonging to the juglet illustrated in Fig. 1:5, was also recovered. 6 These scarabs were previously published in Keel
1997:756, 757, Nos. 22, 23. 7 A Canaanite origin for these scarabs does not argue
against the Egyptian origin of the formula itself,
which may have been adopted on Canaanite scarabs
from media other than Egyptian scarabs. 8 The scarab categorized by Ward as a royal name
scarab of Senwosret II from Bet She'an (Tufnell 1984: Pl. LIL3037) is most probably a Canaanite
production of post Dynasty XII date. Reissues of
royal-name scarabs of early Dynasty XII rulers are
well attested; defining contemporary examples is
a problematic and controversial issue (Ward 1971:
127-135; Ward 1984:151-154; O'Connor 1987:
7, 37, 38; Ward and Dever 1994:128). Canaanite
imitations of Dynasty XII royal-name scarabs are
attested (Ben-Tor 1997: Fig. 4:7-10; 9:1).
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A Middle Bronze Age iib Tomb at Azor 177
References
Albright W.F. 1933. The Excavation of Tell Beit
Mirsim la. The Bronze Age Pottery of the Fourth
Campaign. AASOR 13:55-127. New Haven.
Ben-Tor D. 1997. The Relations between Egypt and
Palestine in the Middle Kingdom as Reflected
by Contemporary Canaanite Scarabs. IEJ 47:
162-189.
DothanM. 1958. Azor./£/8:272-274.
DothanM. 1993. Azor. NEAEHL 1. Pp. 125-129.
DeverW.G. 1986. Gezer IV, 2: The 1969-71 Seasons
in Field VI, the "Acropolis". Jerusalem.
Epstein C. 1974. Middle Bronze Age Tombs at Kefar
Szold and Ginosar. 'Atiqot (HS) 7:13-39 (Hebrew;
English summary, pp. 2*-6*).
Gophna R. 1967. Tombs near Bet Dagan. HA 22-23:
21 (Hebrew).
Gophna R. and Ayalon E. 1998. Map of Herzliyya
(69) (Archaeological Survey of Israel). Jerusalem.
Gophna R. and Beck P. 1981. The Rural Aspect of
the Settlement Pattern of the Coastal Plain in the
Middle Bronze Age II. Tel Aviv 8:45-80.
Gophna R. and Beck P. 1988. Middle Bronze Age
Rural Settlements of the Coastal Plain. In S.
Bunimovitz, M. Kochavi and A. Kasher eds.
Settlement, Population and Economics in Ancient
Israel. Tel Aviv. Pp. 73-123 (Hebrew).
Griffith RL. 1890. The Antiquities of Tell el
Yahudiyeh and Miscellaneous Work in Lower
Egypt during the Years 1887-1888 (Egypt
Exploration Fund 7). London.
HA 1978. Archaeological Survey of Israel: Maps of
Herzliyya and Even Yehuda. HA 65-66:21-23
(Hebrew).
Hallote R. 1994. Mortuary Practices and their
Implications for Social Organization in the
Middle Bronze Age Southern Levant. Ph.D. diss.,
University of Chicago. Chicago.
Kaplan J. 1955. A Cemetery of the Bronze Age
Discovered near Tel Aviv Harbour. 'Atiqot (ES)
1:1-12.
Kaplan J. 1971. Mesopotamian Elements in the
Middle Bronze II Culture of Palestine. JNES 30:
293-307.
Kaplan J. 1978.Tcl Aviv.£/1£WL4. Pp. 1164-1165.
Keel O. 1995. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette
aus Palastina/Israel. (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
Series Archaeologica 10). Freiburg-Gôttingen.
Keel O. 1997. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette
aus Palastina/Israel. Katalog Band 1: Von Tell
Abu Farag bis 'Atlit (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
Series Archaeologica 13). Freiburg-Gôttingen.
Kenyon K.M. 1960. Excavations at Jericho I: The
Tombs Excavated in 1952-4. London.
Kirkbride D. 1965. Appendix E: Scarabs. In K.M.
Kenyon. Excavations at Jericho II: The Tombs
Excavated in 1955-8. London. Pp. 580-655.
Kitchen K.A. 1989. An Early West Semitic Epigraph on a Scarab from Tell Abu Zureiq? IEJ 39:
278-280. Kochavi M., Beck P. and Gophna R. 1979. Aphek
Antipatris, Tel Poleg, Tel Zeror and Tel Burga: four
fortified sites of the Middle Bronze Age IIA in the
Sharon Plain. ZDPV95:121-165.
Levy Y. 1993. Rishon Leziyyon Sand Dunes. ESI 13:
57-59.
Negbi O. 1989. Bronze Age Pottery (Strata
XVII-XV). In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp Jr. and O.
Negbi eds. Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel (Tel
Aviv University Publications of the Institute of
Archaeology 8). Minneapolis and Tel Aviv. Pp.
43-63. O'Connor D. 1987. The Chronology of Scarabs of
the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate
Period. Journal of the Society for the Study of
Egyptian Antiquities 15:1־A1.
Oren E.D. 1997. The "Kingdom of Sharuhen" and the
Hyksos Kingdom. In E.D. Oren ed. The Hyksos:
New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives.
Philadelphia. Pp. 253-283.
Ory J. 1926. Pottery of the Middle Bronze Age, and
Bronze Objects from Nes-Ziona, in Wady Hanin
(Near Jaffa). Palestine Museum Bulletin 2:10-11.
Ory J. 1945. A Middle Bronze Age Tomb at El-Jisr.
QDAP 12:31^12.
Ory J. 1948. A Bronze Age Cemetery at Dhahrat el
Humraya. QDAP 13:75-89.
Petrie W.M.F. 1906. Hyksos and Israelite Cities
(British School of Archaeology in Egypt 12).
London.
Petrie W.M.F. and Quibell J.E. 1896. Naqada and
Ballas. London.
Porat Y., Yannai E. and Kasher A. 1999.
Archaeological Remains at Jatt. 4Atiqot 37:1-78
(Hebrew; English summary, pp. 167*—170*).
Richards F.V. 1992. Scarab Seals from a Middle
to Late Bronze Tomb at Pella in Jordan (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 117). Freiburg-Gôttingen.
Richards F.V. 2001. The Anra Scarab: An
Archaeological and Historical Approach (BAR
Int. S. 919). Oxford.
Stein D.L. This volume. An Old Syrian Cylinder Seal
from Azor.
Teissier B. 1996. Egyptian Iconography on
Syrio-Palestinian Cylinder Seals of the Middle
Bronze Age (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Series
Archaeologica 11). Fribourg-Gôttingen.
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
178 Amir Gorzalczany, Daphna Ben-Tor and Jonathan Rand
Tufnell O. 1973. The Middle Bronze Age Scarab
Seals from Burials on the Mound at Megiddo. Levant 5:69-82.
Tufnell 0.1975. Seal Impressions from Kahun Town
and Uronarti Fort. JEA 61:69-82.
Tufnell O. 1984. Studies on Scarab Seals II: Scarab
Seals and their Contribution to History in the
Early Second Millennium B. C. Warminister.
Ward W.A. 1971. Egypt and the Mediterranean
World 2200-1900 B.C. Studies in Egyptian
Foreign Relations during the First Intermediate
Period. Beirut.
Ward W.A. 1984. Royal-Name Scarabs. In O. Tufnell
Studies on Scarab Seals II: Scarab Seals and
their Contribution to History in the Early Second
Millennium B.C. Warminister. Pp. 151-192.
Ward W.A. 1987. Scarab Typology and Techno
logical Context. AJA 91:507-532.
Ward W.A. and Dever W.G. 1994. Studies on Scarab
Seals III: Scarab Typology and Archaeological Context. An Essay on Middle Bronze Age
Chronology. San Antonio.
This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:57:02 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Recommended